Open Letter

The work of Zecharia Sitchin was brought to my attention in 2001,
shortly after I completed my book, The Facade. As a trained scholar
in ancient Semitic languages with a lifelong interest in UFOs and
paranormal phenomena, I was naturally enthused about Mr. Sitchin's
studies, particularly since I had also heard he was a Sumerian
scholar. I thought I had found a kindred spirit. Unfortunately, I
was wrong. Zecharia Sitchin is not a scholar of ancient languages.
What he has written in his books could neither pass peer review nor
is it informed by factual data from the primary sources. I have yet
to find anyone with credentials or demonstrable expertise in
Sumerian, Akkadian, or any of the other ancient Semitic languages
who has positively assessed Mr. Sitchin's academic work.

The reader must realize that the substance of my disagreement is
not due to "translation philosophy," as though Mr. Sitchin and I
merely disagree over possible translations of certain words. When it
comes to the Mesopotamian sources, what is at stake is the integrity
of the cuneiform tablets themselves, along with the legacy of Sumer
and Mesopotamian scribes. Very simply, the ancient Mesopotamians
compiled their own dictionaries - we have them and they have been
published since the mid-20th century. The words Mr. Sitchin tells us
refer to rocket ships have no such meanings according to the ancient
Mesopotamians themselves. Likewise when Mr. Sitchin tells readers
things like the Sumerians believed there were twelve planets, the
Anunnaki were space travelers, Nibiru was the supposed 12th planet,
etc., he is simply fabricating data. It isn't a question of how he
translates texts; the issue is that these ideas don't exist in any
cuneiform text at all. To persist in embracing Mr. Sitchin's views
on this matter (and a host of others) amounts to rejecting the
legacy of the ancient Sumerian and Akkadian scribes whose labors
have come down to us from the ages. Put bluntly, is it more coherent
to believe a Mesopotamian scribe's definition of a word, or Mr.
Sitchin's?

Zecharia Sitchin's work in other texts, such as the Bible, is
equally flawed. This site bears witness to the sorts of errors
Sitchin makes in language analysis and translation with respect to
the Hebrew Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

What I've said here is very straightforward. It would be quite
easy to demonstrate that I am wrong. All one needs to do is produce
texts that I say don't exist, and produce verification of Sitchin's
translations by other experts (that's called peer review). Since I
don't believe such evidence will be forthcoming, I wrote what
follows as an open
letter to Zecharia Sitchin in 2001. With Mr. Sitchin's passing, I
now direct the letter (rewritten on Jan 1, 2011) to his followers
and other ancient astronaut theorists whose views are, in many ways,
based upon Sitchin's original work.

Dear Ancient Astronaut Enthusiast:

The intent of this letter is in the
interest of research, not confrontation. In no way do I intend to
impugn anyone's character. What I ask is that you provide answers and
data to support your theories. Here are my
questions / requests.

1. Can you please provide transcripts of Zecharia Sitchin's academic
ancient language work? I
would like to post this information on my website, and would gladly
do so.

2. Can you explain why Sitchin's work on Genesis 1:26-27 overlooks so
many obvious grammatical indications that the word elohim in that
passage refers to a single deity (as demonstrated on this website)?

3. Can you explain why Zecharia Sitchin (or you in turn) have not included the comparative
linguistic material from the Amarna texts that shows the Akkadian
language also uses the plural word for "gods" to refer to a
single
deity or person (which of course undermines the argument that elohim must refer to a plurality of gods)?

4. Can you explain how the interpretation of the word "nephilim"
as referring to "people of the fiery rockets" is at all viable in
light of the rules of Hebrew morphology? In other words, can you bring forth a single ancient text
where naphal has such a meaning?

5. Can you produce a single text that says the Anunnaki come from
the planet Nibiru - or that Nibiru is a planet beyond Pluto? I
assert that there are no such texts, and challenge you and your readers
to study the occurrences of "Anunnaki" right here on this website.
Here is a video where I show readers how to conduct a search online
at the Electronic Corpus of Sumerian Literature website. There are
182 occurrences of the divine name Anunnaki. Please show me any
evidence from the Sumerian texts themselves that the Anunnaki have
any connection to Nibiru or a 12th planet (or any planet).

6. Can you explain why the alleged sun symbol on cylinder seal VA
243 is not the normal sun symbol or the symbol for the sun god
Shamash?

7. Can you explain why your god = planet equivalencies do not match
the listings of such matching in cuneiform astronomical texts? I
recently
blogged on this issue and provided a recent scholarly
article on the planets in Mesopotamian literature by experts in
cuneiform as proof that Sitchin erred in this regard.

8. Can you explain why many of Sitchin's word meanings /
translations of Sumerian and Mesopotamian words are not consistent
with Mesopotamian cuneiform bilingual dictionaries, produced by
Akkadian scribes?

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I will of course post
any responses on this site.